User:Jometcalf13579/Clay Apenouvon/YogurtBear123 Peer Review

General info
(provide username) Jometcalf13579
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Jometcalf13579/Clay Apenouvon - Wikipedia
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Clay Apenouvon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Clay Apenouvon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

I believe that the editor did good job with gathering general information. Compared to previous versions of the article, the updated version had an abundance of information. However, there were some simple parts which I found needed just slight improvement. Firstly, the grammar utilized has some errors. There is a misuse of punctuations and tenses, which isn't that major but not as formal. Secondly, the sectioning of the article can be divided into more parts. The editor does a good job with the Lead & Article Body separation but can further improve by segmenting the Body into categories like "Style" or "Works/Shows."

In terms of positives, there were many. The editor is fairly neutral in language, and does a good job showing Apenouvon's influences plus background. I think there could be a lot more references listed though, as currently, there is just one. Simple things, like links to countries or specific events, can be improved with links or further citations. I feel like compared to the existing version of the Wiki article; the editor did a much better job of encapsulating the specific style of their chosen artist; with a description of materials plus inspirations found. ￼

I think the editor should keep this reference to artistic detail, but also talk about Apenouvon's history beyond childhood and more into adulthood. There is a lot of information about his work with other artists that maybe could be interesting. Besides for that and just little things like grammar, the editor did a good job. They definitely have the accurate and important information, but just need to better reference it.